LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor, says Obama and Alan Krueger (Obama's new head of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors), said some of the same things in early September, 2011, that were part of Obama's old plan to revive the U.S. economy. And the old plan has failed to produce results. The part that puts construction crews to work on the roads, railways and airports was tried earlier in the stimulus plan. Because of a lack of showel ready projects, and the state governments putting most of the money in their state coffers, this only increased infrastructure by a miniscule 0.05 percent of GDP, according to research by Taylor and John Cogan. Taylor's sees the moves by the Obama administration and the Bernanke Fed as not only being ineffective, but having the opposite effect of lowering investment and consumption demand through increased concerns about the federal debt, another financial crisis or the risk of inflation or deflation. The U.S. private sector has the money to make the investments that create jobs but their concerns have led to holding back. Taylor points to the need for a comprehensive economic strategy to replace these temporary interventions. The debt limit agreement of 2011 is a part of this strategy, and he agrees with reducing spending in a gradual way in a weak economy. The other parts of this strategy he says are entitlement reform, tax reform, regulatory reform, monetary reform, including a reappraisal of the role of government in the economy. This should lead to a more stable and predictable economic environment and reduced uncertainty about the future, which is critical to improving supply and demand....

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump signs an executive order on March 28, 2017, reversing the American commitment to the Paris climate change agreement. The executive order also lifts a moratorium on the sale of coalmining leases on federal lands. The Obama administration 2015 clean power plan was designed to restrict greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. It was blocked by courts in 2016. Trump says he is reversing president Obama's war on coal. Earlier he approved the Keystone pipeline for bringing oil from oil sands in Canada to the U.S.. Under the Paris agreement the U.S. agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions 26-28% by 2025 from 2005 levels. Market changes including the availability of cheap natural gas from technology advances fracking and hydraulic fracturing is leading a shift away from coal, apart from Obama administration regulations. Another factor is the long term trend towards cleaner energy, with large energy producers such as American Electric Power and other companies planning for the long term which is likely to be in the direction of cleaner energy. These companies see the Trump administration changes as a situation that may not be for the long term. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the Obama administration plans a large stimulus spending plan that may approach $1 trillion over several years, considering also the second phase of the $800 billion first phase stimulus, there is a concern that there may be wasteful spending and social costs of borrowing and spending by the government of such proportions. In economics jargon this hinges on whether there is amultiplier effect of spending, higher if its efficiently and well spent with less impact on private consumption and investment, and lower if the opposite were true. The assumption behind amultiplier of 1.0 for an additional bridge or road is that resources like manpower and capital that would be otherwise idle are deployed to produce something useful. An increase in one unit of government purchases increases by one unit the real gross domestic product. The government has effectively created the additional bridge or road without a cut in anybody's consumption or a businesses investment. The other contrasting approaches are to say there is a multiplier of zero, meaning there is a social cost in two ways. One the reduction of consumption and the crowding out of businesses investing in new products and technologies for example, and second in the inefficent use of resources if a government bureaucracy is put to work allocating money and the additional dangers of favoritism and corruption. To say that there is a multipier of 1.5 would mean that the government figures out a way to get private investment through conversion of plants for automotive parts say to make wind turbine blades by giving incentives, tax benefits and grants, spends on a dilapidated road and public transportation infrastructure that may provide benefits in increased growth capacity over future years. The limits of a government bureaucracy and inefficiency of government would in this case be addressed by transparency rules adopted and measures that track progress that are freely available to all citizens say on a website on the internet, and by bringing in fresh management talent from the private sector. There appears to be no generalization that can be applied for one multiplier for all projects. It may be that the multiplier will vary with the project. Some projects like the conversion of a factory making unneeded auto parts to a badly needed wind energy part, to change the dynamics of energy market pricing, to meet energy needs and cut emissions, may end up having a multiplier much above 1.0. A redundant or less needed bridge has a lower multiplier than a bridge rebuilt before it leads to breakdown. And also the complication that too large a movement in one direction say of stimulus spending, might result in a shift of the curve towards a smaller multiplier and diminishing returns, as the resources to track such a large expenditure and the talent to adminster are overextended. The social cost of private investment not making that investment in new technology, new product or improved product has to be figured into all this, both at the conceptual level as all costs and benefits may not be picked up in the analysis, and at the macro level keeping in mind that the animal spirits, as they were once described, may just not be there to absorb the huge outlays which a government can make. These do not come without an opportunity cost and borrowing costs. All this leads one to to conclude that spending has to be carefully evaluated and projects assessed on a case by case basis for costs and benefits. The spending has to be balanced to provide just as many incentives for private investment to invest in new products and technologies. One way the Obama team is attempting to address this is to include a $300 billion tax cut for businesses and individuals. The business tax cuts are aimed at helping small business with losses, and for future investments and making hires and forgoing layoffs. The other part relates to careful evaluation of spending projects and transparency so the people can see if they are effective. See the link to this....

LyrArc Article Gist
Kasman of J.P. Morgan Chase only sees a small upturn in activity, that as he sees it in a world where activity is so depressed that modest changes by business and households give a lift, with unemployment coming down to 9%. Hatzius of Goldman sees unemployment rising in an economy where capacity utilization is extremely low, with unemployment rising to 10.5% even with the best efforts of the government. Hatzius sees a painful defaltion as a serious risk and he points out that the Fed can do less about deflation than it can do about inflation. The one point that both agree on is exports have to give alift to the economy, and both welcome a depreciatipon of the dollar to lift the economy through exports. Hatzius makes the point that the lift to exports is still limited- not enough in exchage rate depreciation of the dollar to help the American economy. And Kasman actually says it now Asia's turn to do their share. We lifted them out of the slump after the 1997 Asian crisis, when their currencies depreciated and exports to the US lifted their economies....

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Reich, a former Labor Secretary, says that instead of "rebalancing" with Chinese consumers buying more American goods and China exporting less to the USA, things are headed in the opposite direction. Why? Because at the macroeconomic level China is devoting more of its country's resources to production capacity. Chinese consumers are taking home a smaller proportion of the total economy. In 2008 personal consumption amounted to 35% of the total economy, whereas in 1998 it was 50%. Capital investment in the same 10 years went up 35% to 44%. Chinese continue to save and these savings are going into infrastructure and manufacturing capacity. There is even a social twist to the savings, with fewer young Chinese women than men parents with boys have to compete in the marraige market and save assets for this. Households are also saving to support more elderly people as population is aging quickly with population policies. All this means that with all the talk (see links to Niall Ferguson and Krugman), the situation will likely roll on in this manner till things reach an impasse, or there is a strong political backlash in the USA which leads to stronger trade actions by the government, or there is a crisis. Meanwhile the trade deficit is headed higher and Chinese foreign reserves will go far above the current $2.3 trillion. And the Europeans will also be getting restless with their trade imbalance, as the euro edges higher and the yuan remians pegged to the dollar, leading to trade distortions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Yale Prof. Fair says that evidence from his model shows the yuan appreciation having a positive effect on American jobs looks better than it really is. Two negative effects are in play. The first is that Chinese output decreases will have an effect on Chinese imports that will affect US exports. And the other effect that will come into play is the increase in US prices. His conclusion is that it unlikely we will see a large increase in American jobs from the appreciation of China's currency.

LyrArc Article Gist
See the important link to Keith Johnson, 7/9/2007, WSJ, on the economics of wind energy, suppliers, and the industry in the US and Europe, and the shortage of turbines because of some 800 parts that go into the turbines and blades making it a complicated supplier issue to get more turbines. We can make only more turbines as fast as we can access the last of some 8000 components says a Vestas executive. Windmill generated electricity was only 0.4% of the electricity generated in the US compared to 0.1% for solar and 0.4% for geothermal but of the new energy added in the US in 2007 it was 30% of the new energy generating capacity added. So it has a disproportionate share of the increase in generating capacity starting from an insignificant base. Its a new industry but with many companies the largest being Vestas of Denmark, GE Energy, Nordex of Germany and Accoiona of Spain. Germany, the US, Spain India, and China are countries at the forefron of the wind energy business. Because the business is relatively new manufacturers were not providing the installation and maintenance required in emerging market countries in 1995 when Suzlon which had powered its yarn business in Surat, Gujarat with 2 wind energy turbines from Vestas entered the business seeing an opportunity. Mr Tanti of Rajkot, Gujarat, Suzlon's founder saw the opportunity and used European firms to design his turbines and blades and provided energy to Bajaj Auto and large Indian companies that have an erratic supply of electricity because of chronic electricity shortages. Starting with a tax break which allowed Suzlon to deduct windmill costs against its sales tax bill enacted in 1999 and retracted in 2002 Suzlon took advantage of lower manufacturing costs in India. Its main plant is in Pondicherry, India. By 2002 sales had increased to $131 million in India from $32 million in 2000. The company entered the US market in 2003 and in 2004 with the boomin stock market in India Citigroup took a 9% stake in Suzlon for $22 million. By 2005 Suzlon because of lower manufacturing costs had margns of20% compared to 8% for European companies and Suzlon raised $340 million in an IPO. With loans from Barclays and Deutsche Bank Suzlon bought European parts makers Hansen Transmission in 2006 and set up a factory in Tianjin, India. Early on in the 1990's it had set up an R&D center using engineers in Germany of a supplier company in wind energy Sudwind that had exited the business, this R&D center now designed its largest turbine for US and European markets of 2.1 megawatts and blades 50 yards in length. Today Tanti and Suzlon are faced with problems accessing the world class technology of the western companies as its technology has not kept up with the technological advances especially in addressing the needs of western markets. It has about 8% of the US market and about $1.8 billion in global sales. Its pricing to Edison Energy in 2006 for 1.2 megawatt turbines was 20% below European and American manufacturers. Its latest designs have flaws because Edison Energy of Irvine , California, has seen cracks in the blades at 3 windmill sites in the midwest USA and Suzlon has withdrawn 1251 blades, the majority of the ones sold in the US. Deere and Company another customer has experienced the same problem. And even though it has moved to acquire technology by taking over 33.6% of REpower which has advanced technology and makes 5 megawatt turbines. its mired in its efforts to get the blueprints of advanced designs from REpower because German law considers minority shareholders like Suzlon as competitors, other shareholders Areva of France and Martifer of Portugal have to be bought out and minority shareholders also bought out before Suzlon can access the designs. Speed, funding, tax breaks, and timing to attract capital, and most of all insight and courage to see a growing opportunity from its own experience of using two 2.1 megawatt turbines from Denmark's Vestas, and looking deeper into problems with maintenance and support in Asia and lack of technology for homegrown development that hamstrung development of energy alternatives in dire and chronic electricity short Indian companies, this has helped bring windpower to India and a new company in a new industry from scratch. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Gordon Brown, former prime minister of Britain from 2007 to 2010, chaired the April 2009 G-20 meeting that came up with ways to tackle the global financial crisis. Brown also led the way by recapitalizing British banks, a step the U.S. followed. He comments on the volatility in financial markets in August 2007 following the S&P credit downgrade of the U.S.. Brown gives an incomplete grade to the tasks the 2009 G-20 set out to accomplish. He points to three goals the G-20 had set in the middle of the financial crisis in April 2009. The first was to prevent a recession from becoming a depression. The other two were to establish a financial stability regime, and a compact for growth. These two became paper promises says Brown. Brown sees the best approach to prevent a lost decade is for U.S. and Europe trading their way out of a downturn as the Asian market absorbs more industrial goods from Europe and the U.S. This includes policies that would keep commodity prices low and ways of coping with currency shocks. Analysts have pointed to an export led recovery as one of the solutions the U.S. was hoping to achieve with a lower value of the dollar. This has had only limited success because of deep structural problems- high consumer indebtedness, bad debt at the banks, weak housing sector following the mortgage crisis, and a rising U.S. deficit- which will take some time to clear. Brown does not come to grips with these underlying imbalances built up during the boom years of the last decade, both in Britain and in the U.S., during which he was the finance minister of Britain....

LyrArc Article Gist
The weaker dollar has given a boost to U.S. exports. The dollar has dropped by 9.1% compared to the prior year against a broad basket of currencies. U.S. exports have provided 1.4 percentage points of the 3.0% annualized growth since the 3rd quarter of 2009. The U.S. dollar is now 5% away from its all time low in March 2008, when tracked using the dollar index. Before the 2008 crisis the dollar had over a six year period lost about 40% of its value. Low interest rates in the U.S. and concerns about the deficit have contributed to the dollar's decline in value. While the decline helps boost exports, it also increases the price of oil in dollar terms and increases inflation. A Gallup poll in April showed 42% of Americans had no confidence in the Fed's policies for the economy, and 43% had no faith in Treasury Secretary Geithner. The decline is taking place even as Japan is recovering from the earthquake, and Greece is likely to have to restructure its debt obligations with European banks taking losses....

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany generated 45% of its energy from coal and 25% from renewable energy sources in 2013, according to AG Energiebilanzen. Chancellor Merkel, who as environment minister supported the Kyoto agreement in 1997, announced a plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions by an additional 62 to 78 million tons by 2020. The cuts will rest largely on improving energy efficiency, and with a third of the cuts in the power industry. With the drive to close 17 nuclear plants in Germany, the power industry has increasingly relied on coal generated energy. This is an effort to change this situation. It is supported by German public opinion.

LyrArc Article Gist
China announced that it would make its exchange rate flexible, but also emphasized that it would do so gradually. What this means is that China will have a managed floating exchange rate. China followed a managed floating policy between mid 2005 and mid 2008, with a 21% upward valuation during that period for the yuan. During the 2008 crisis upto now the rate was pegged. The yuan was pegged at 6.83 yuan to the dollar. China is now rebalancing its economy so that it is not overly dependent on exports. The idea is to let domestic wages and domestic consumption pick up the slack in the markets of Europe and the USA. Europe is taking up austerity measures, and the mood in the US is shifting towards concern about growing budget and trade deficits. See the groups for "China wages" and "China workers."

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that some depreciation in the value of the dollar is welcome because it would make US exports more competitive and reduce our trade deficit. He says China's policy of keeping the yuan pegged to the dollar actually devalues the Chinese currency and makes it possible for China to siphon off growth from other countries. So what should America do. By putting pressure on China to revalue the yuan upward would America be risking China responding by selling some f its $2.1 trillion in dollar assets. This would not be such abad thing if the Chinese sold some of their dollar assets says Krugman, as lowering the value of the dollar at this time is not such abad thing. Malpass and Alan Meltzer of Carnegie Mellon, point out the importance of maintaining the value of the dollar in a separate piece. There the idea is not to have sharp fall in the value of the dollar that could economic disruption because of loss of confidence in the currency as opposed to a gradual decline.

LyrArc Article Gist
Details of the $825 billion stimulus plan. Renewable energy does well under the plan including production tax credit for renewables, with $32 billion for a "smart" electrical grid for which GE makes components and lobbied for. Renewable energy producers win an extension of production tax credits now convertible into cash for companies whose losses leave them unable to use the credits. Transportation infrastructure green projects did not do so well, with $32 billion for transportation projects and only $10 billion for mass transit projects.The Natural Resources Defense Council had compiled a list of more than 80 environmentally friendly infrastructure and transportation projects worth about $405 billion. Only a small number of these projects made it. What is in the stimulus to create jobs and stimulate capital investment? Businesses get bonus depreciation, which speeds up depreciation deductions for companies that invest in plant and equipment. The stimulus doubles the amount small businesses can immediately write off for capital investments and purchasing new eqipment, and gives incentives for businesses to invest in renewable energy. States get help with $90 billion going to increase the federal share of Medicaid payments, and an additional $79 billion to help states avoid cutbacks in education and other services. And there is a "Make Work Pay" tax credit for $500 per worer and $1000 per couple. Experts say the effects of the stimulus will be felt in the latter part of 2009 and into 2010. Which is one reason the view of economists that there would be a second half recovery does not reflect conditions on the ground. Goldman has revised its view to 2010 and even that may be optimistic. One example of what has happened in the stimulus in this respect is that the earlier optimistic view of largeinvestments in science and technology, broadband networks, and transportation projects for fast rail and transit have all been trimmed down. Part of the reason may be that the bill for the nation's banking system revival may be larger than realized as an additional amount of $15-20 billion is being negotiated for Bank of America and more money will go to Citigroup. $6 billion is shown for highspeed internet access for rural and underserved areas. Science facilities get $10 billion. Repair of public infrastructure (read roads and bridges) gets $31 billion. School modernization gets $21 billion. And modernization of health information technology systems gets $20 billion which its hoped will provide equivalent or higher returns to pay for some of the universal health care costs, and preventative care gets $4 billion. There is a tax credit for R&D work on energy innovations and renewable energy production of $20 billion, and $32 billion for a "smart electricity grid." These are the proactive parts of the stimulus that create something new and make improvements. They add up to $144 billion. So much money goes to shore up the existing services and supplement incomes, and to relieve stresses on the banking system, and other ways to shore up the system, that the proactive expenditures are only a small fraction or 17% of the $825 billion stimulus. And all the time the federal deficit and debt increases with these huge outlays just to shore up the system. The Heritage Foundation Data Analysis Director Mr. Beach told Congressmen at a discussion chaired by Congressman Cantor (R), on January 16, 2009, that the federal debt would reach 92% of the nation's GDP in 2009 from 58 billion or 70% in 2008, with the $825 billion for stimulus. The federal deficit would go up to $1.31 trillion or 9.2% of GDP up from $541 billion in 2008. See the research paper on the Heritage website. ...